Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The extracellular matrix (ECM) is a dynamic mechanochemical network that integrates biochemical ligands with physical cues—such as stiffness, viscoelasticity, topography, and confinement—to regulate cell fate and tissue homeostasis. Cells sense and transmit ECM-derived forces through integrin-based adhesions, the actin cytoskeleton, mechanosensitive ion channels, and the LINC complex, coupling cytoplasmic tension to nuclear mechanics, chromatin organization, and transcriptional programs. In this review, we summarize key mechanobiological principles across major ECM contexts and outline how “mechanical niches” are established and remodeled during development and repair. We highlight the adhesion–nucleus–chromatin axis and central transcriptional hubs, including YAP/TAZ-mediated mechanotransduction, that translate extracellular mechanics into gene expression and epigenetic memory. We further discuss how ECM stiffening, altered viscoelastic relaxation, and matrix compositional switching drive disease progression, with emphasis on fibrosis, cancer, and vascular pathologies. Finally, we survey emerging experimental platforms—tunable hydrogels, engineered and decellularized ECM, and quantitative 3D culture/organoid systems—that enable controlled perturbation of ECM mechanics and multiscale readouts. These approaches provide a foundation for improved biomarkers and therapeutic strategies aimed at normalizing pathological microenvironments and restoring tissue function.

Keywords

extracellular matrix mechanobiology mechanotransduction matrix stiffness viscoelasticity nuclear mechanics epigenetics fibrosis cancer mechano-therapies

Introduction

Tissues experience constant mechanical inputs, including tensile stress, compression, shear, and confinement. The extracellular matrix (ECM) constitutes the primary mechanical and structural scaffold that transmits and integrates these forces with biochemical signals.^1–3 Classical views of the ECM as a static support have been replaced by a dynamic picture in which ECM composition, architecture, and mechanics continuously adapt to cellular activity and environmental cues, thereby feeding back on cell behavior.^1–4

The modern concept of the “matrisome” has revealed that the ECM is not a single entity but a family of tissue-specific matrices that differ in protein composition, post-translational modifications, organization, and mechanical behavior.³ Distinct ECM types—including basement membranes underlying epithelia and endothelia, fibrillar interstitial matrices in connective tissues, pericellular and glycocalyx-like matrices enveloping individual cells, provisional matrices assembled during injury and repair, and specialized mineralized or load-bearing matrices in bone and cartilage—are increasingly recognized as functionally and mechanically distinct niches that encode specific mechanical “instructions” to cells. Key ECM types and their characteristic mechanical features are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1.

Representative ECM types, principal components, and key mechanical features relevant to mechanotransduction.

ECM type	Major components	Mechanical traits	Representative mechano-outputs
Basement membrane	Laminins; collagen IV; nidogens; perlecan	Thin sheet-like; typically compliant; stiffens with crosslinking/aging	Polarity/barrier; angiogenesis; junctional signaling; YAP/TAZ tuning^{1–3,19,22,23}
Interstitial fibrillar matrix	Collagen I/III; fibronectin; elastin; proteoglycans	Fibrillar; anisotropic; strain-stiffening; stiffens with collagen/crosslinking/alignment	Fibroblast activation/migration; desmoplasia; myofibroblast differentiation^{2–4,15,17,19,21}
Pericellular/glycocalyx layer	Hyaluronan; proteoglycans (e.g., syndecans); glycoproteins	Hydrated, viscoelastic; filters shear/compression; modulates ligand access	Mechanoprotection; integrin clustering; ion-channel activity; immune modulation^3,8,22,31,32
Provisional wound matrix	Fibrin; fibronectin (incl. EDA); thrombospondins	Dynamic and remodelable; transient stiffening during repair	Wound closure and contraction; persistence promotes scarring^9–14,19
Mineralized/load-bearing matrix	Bone: Collagen I + hydroxyapatite; cartilage: Collagen II + aggrecan	High stiffness/load capacity; cartilage shows viscoelasticity	Osteo-/chondrogenesis; stiffness-driven lineage and nuclear adaptation^{15,17,19,21,61,62}

Mechanotransduction—the conversion of physical inputs into biochemical and gene-regulatory responses—underpins fundamental processes such as morphogenesis, stem cell fate decisions, immune responses, and tissue repair, and is increasingly recognized as a central driver of diseases including organ fibrosis, tumor progression and metastasis, cardiovascular and pulmonary disorders, and degenerative conditions.^5–21 Within mechanobiology, the ECM occupies a privileged position as both the origin and target of mechanical signals: cells remodel their surrounding ECM by producing, degrading, and reorganizing matrix components, thereby creating feedback loops in which ECM mechanics and cellular responses co-evolve over time.^3,4,8,9

Cell–matrix mechanotransduction: From adhesions to signaling networks

Integrin-mediated adhesions and focal adhesion maturation

Cells sense ECM mechanics largely through integrins, which bind ECM ligands such as fibronectin, collagen, laminin, and vitronectin, and organize into focal adhesions (FAs), multi-protein complexes containing talin, vinculin, paxillin, FAK, Src-family kinases, and scaffolding molecules.^1–4,22,23 Force-dependent unfolding of talin and recruitment of vinculin link integrins to actomyosin stress fibers, enabling cells to apply contractile forces and “probe” ECM stiffness.^5,24,25

On stiff substrates, resistance to cell-generated forces promotes FA growth and stabilization, leading to enhanced FAK/Src signaling, RhoA activation, elevated actomyosin contractility, and reinforcement of stress fibers; on soft matrices, limited resistance leads to smaller, more transient adhesions and diminished mechanotransductive signaling.^4,5,8,16 In 3D interstitial and basement membrane–like matrices, integrins assemble distinct adhesion structures (e.g., fibrillar adhesions, 3D matrix adhesions, invadopodia-like protrusions) whose composition and lifetime depend on local ECM type, fiber orientation, and degradability (Figure 1).^26–28

Figure 1.

Stiffness-dependent maturation of focal adhesions. On soft substrates, adhesions remain small and dynamic with limited force transmission, whereas stiff substrates support reinforcement of integrin–talin–vinculin linkages, stress-fiber formation, and growth into stable force-bearing focal adhesions.

Cytoskeleton dynamics and mechano-sensitive machineries

The actin cytoskeleton, intermediate filaments, and microtubules form integrated networks that transmit mechanical forces from the plasma membrane to the nucleus.^5,29,30 Myosin II–driven contractility generates tensile forces in actin stress fibers; cross-talk with microtubules and intermediate filaments such as vimentin and cytokeratins stabilizes cell shape and modulates load-bearing capacity.

Mechanosensitive machineries include stretch-activated ion channels (e.g., Piezo1), mechano-regulated small GTPases (RhoA, Rac1, Cdc42), and conformationally responsive cytoskeletal proteins that change binding affinities or enzymatic activity under force.^5,6,8,31,32 The relative contributions of these systems depend on ECM type: cells embedded in viscoelastic, fibrillar interstitial matrices rely heavily on actomyosin contractility and proteolysis to create migration tracks, whereas cells on basement membranes or in pericellular matrices may be more sensitive to local tension, shear, and glycocalyx-mediated force filtering. Forces sensed at adhesions are distributed through actin, microtubules, and intermediate filaments and relayed to the nuclear envelope via the LINC complex, enabling mechanical regulation of nuclear shape and chromatin organization.^33,34

YAP/TAZ and other transcriptional mechanotransducers

The transcriptional co-activators YAP and TAZ are central hubs converting mechanical cues into gene expression programs. ECM stiffness, cell spreading, and cytoskeletal tension promote nuclear localization and activation of YAP/TAZ, whereas soft matrices, reduced actomyosin contractility, or cell confinement drive their cytoplasmic retention.^6,7,35–37 Multiple pathways couple ECM mechanics to YAP/TAZ, including integrin–FAK/Src–RhoA–ROCK–actomyosin signaling, interactions with the Hippo kinase cascade, and nuclear mechanics that influence nuclear pore transport.^{6,11,30,35,36,38–40}

Computational and experimental studies have revealed that YAP/TAZ responses depend on cell shape, nuclear shape, ECM type (basement membrane vs interstitial vs 3D hydrogels), and dimensionality (2D vs 3D), and that nuclear deformation serves as a key integrator of mechanical cues upstream of YAP/TAZ activation.^{11,36,37,39,42,43} In fibroblasts, matrix stiffness–driven YAP/TAZ activation coordinates a positive feedback loop that sustains matrix deposition and fibrogenesis.^7–9

ECM mechanics and cellular metabolism

Matrix stiffness and architecture modulate cellular metabolism, including glycolysis, oxidative phosphorylation, and biosynthetic pathways. ECM-induced cytoskeletal tension and YAP/TAZ activity intersect with metabolic regulators (e.g., mTOR, AMPK) and influence mitochondrial dynamics and reactive oxygen species, linking mechanical cues to metabolic reprogramming in development, regeneration, and disease.^8,41,42 Recent work suggests that stiffness- and viscoelasticity-dependent metabolic states may help define “mechanotypes” of cells that predict their behavior in homeostasis and pathology.^41,42 Tissue-specific ECM types impose distinct metabolic demands—for example, cells in highly crosslinked, stiff interstitial matrices versus cells on compliant basement membranes or within soft pericellular matrices—further diversifying mechano-metabolic coupling.

The nucleus as a mechanosensitive organelle

Force transmission to the nucleus via the LINC complex

The nucleus is coupled to the cytoskeleton through the LINC (linker of nucleoskeleton and cytoskeleton) complex, allowing external forces to deform nuclear shape, strain the nuclear lamina, and reorganize chromatin.^29,30,33,34 Lamin A/C and B-type lamins form the nuclear lamina, which provides mechanical stability and participates in gene regulation through lamina-associated domains. Nuclear deformation alters the spatial organization of chromatin and nuclear bodies, thereby influencing transcriptional programs.^{29,30,43–46} These nuclear mechanotransduction pathways and associated epigenetic outcomes are discussed in Sections 3.^2–4,47

Lamin a scaling with tissue stiffness

Landmark work demonstrated that lamin A levels scale with tissue stiffness: nuclei in cells derived from stiff tissues (e.g., bone, muscle) are lamin A–rich and mechanically robust, whereas those from soft tissues (e.g., brain, fat) are lamin A–poor and more deformable.⁴⁵ Matrix elasticity can upregulate lamin A levels and turnover, tuning nuclear mechanics to match the mechanical environment and contributing to lineage specification.^30,45,46

More recent studies have shown coordinated increases in nuclear tension and lamin A with ECM stiffness and cytoskeletal prestress, providing a mechanistic basis for long-term nuclear adaptation to mechanical microenvironments, as well as protective roles of lamin A/C against mechanical damage.^18,29,46 These adaptations occur in parallel with ECM remodeling, linking organ-specific ECM types and mechanics to nucleus-scale structural changes (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Matrix stiffness regulates nuclear mechanics and Lamin A levels.

Nuclear deformation and gene regulation

ECM stiffening and cell-generated traction forces can flatten or elongate nuclei, leading to redistribution of nuclear stresses and nuclear lamina “unwrinkling.” Once the lamina becomes taut, further deformation can trigger changes in chromatin organization and gene expression.^30,43,44

3D matrix confinement and anisotropic ECM architectures—such as aligned collagen fibers in interstitial tumor stroma or dense provisional matrices in wounds—can induce nuclear envelope folding, chromatin condensation or decondensation, and changes in accessibility of mechano-sensitive loci, thereby reprogramming gene expression patterns associated with lineage specification, migration, and invasion.^{30,38,43,44,48} Recent models describe nuclei as “drops” with surface tension regulated by lamin A/C, linking nuclear shape changes to YAP/TAZ nuclear localization and mechanosensitive transcription.^11,38,43

Matrix stiffness and epigenetic reprogramming

Mechanical cues from the ECM modulate epigenetic states, including DNA methylation, histone modifications, and chromatin accessibility. Matrix stiffness can act as a biphasic regulator of epigenetic reprogramming efficiency and has been shown to influence chromatin-modifying enzymes and the accessibility of lineage-specific gene loci.^41,48

In cancer and fibrosis, increased matrix stiffness and altered ECM type (e.g., replacement of compliant basement membranes with stiff, collagen-rich interstitial or provisional matrices) can epigenetically regulate oncogenic or pro-fibrotic programs (including YAP/TAZ target genes), and softening or “normalization” of the ECM can partially reverse such epigenetic changes, highlighting direct links between mechanical microenvironments and gene regulation.^{9,13,41,42,48}

ECM mechanobiology in tissue homeostasis and disease

Fibrosis and wound healing

Fibrosis is characterized by excessive deposition and crosslinking of ECM, leading to progressive tissue stiffening, architectural distortion, and loss of organ function. Activated fibroblasts and myofibroblasts are central effectors that both sense and remodel matrix mechanics, integrating pro-fibrotic cytokines and growth factors with changes in stiffness, viscoelasticity, and topography.^{4,7–11,13,14,19,38,41,49} Fibrotic matrices typically show expansion of fibrillar collagens I and III, accumulation of fibronectin (including EDA-containing isoforms), periostin, thrombospondins, and other matricellular proteins, along with altered proteoglycan and glycosaminoglycan content that modify interstitial fluid flow and tissue swelling.^{4,8–11,13,14,19,21,49} Beyond bulk stiffening, changes in stress relaxation and plasticity create mechanical “memory” that stabilizes myofibroblast phenotypes even after the initial injury subsides, helping to explain why late-stage fibrosis is often refractory to therapy.^{7–9,14,38,41,49,50}

During physiological wound healing, transient increases in ECM stiffness and tension within fibrin- and fibronectin-rich provisional matrices are required for clot retraction, wound closure, and subsequent remodeling. Failure to resolve these mechanical cues, to re-establish compliant basement membranes, or to downregulate matrix crosslinking locks fibroblasts into persistently activated states and redirects repair programs from regeneration toward scarring.^{9–14,19,49,50} Recent work in skin, lung, liver, and kidney has emphasized that fibrosis arises from coupled stromal–immune mechanotransduction networks, in which matrix stiffness, tensile strain, and altered ECM composition potentiate profibrotic signaling in fibroblasts while simultaneously reprogramming macrophages, T cells, and other immune populations toward inflammatory and pro-fibrogenic states.^{9–13,19,49,50} The mechanotransduction–immune axis in organ fibrosis has therefore emerged as a dual regulatory system that coordinates chronic ECM deposition, immune activation, and aberrant tissue repair, and is increasingly viewed as a targetable bottleneck for anti-fibrotic interventions.^19,41,49,50 Recent work has further defined fibrotic ECM as a driver of organ-level dysfunction by showing that stiff, confining matrices corrupt actomyosin-dependent tension to distort organelles such as the nucleus, endoplasmic reticulum, Golgi apparatus, endolysosomal system, biomolecular condensates, and mitochondria, thereby sustaining organelle stress and pro-fibrotic signaling.⁵¹ In parallel, studies in hepatic fibrosis demonstrate that hepatic stellate cells can be pharmacologically reprogrammed to degrade collagen-rich ECM, in which inhibition of acid ceramidase activates a PKCα–ERK1/2–AP1–MMP-1 pathway that enhances collagen clearance and promotes regression of established liver fibrosis.⁵² Representative disease contexts in which ECM mechanics actively drive pathogenesis are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2.

Representative disease contexts in which ECM mechanics actively drive pathogenesis.

Disease area/context	Dominant ECM mechanical changes	Key mechanobiological consequences
Fibrosis and chronic wound remodeling	Progressive stiffening of interstitial and provisional matrices; increased collagen content and crosslinking; loss of normal compliance	Persistent myofibroblast activation and contractility; transition from provisional to scar matrix; impaired resolution and regeneration^7–14,19,49
Solid tumors and tumor microenvironment	Collagen densification and alignment; LOX-mediated crosslinking; disruption of basement membrane; elevated tissue stiffness	Enhanced proliferation, epithelial–mesenchymal transition, invasion, and metastatic potential; immune exclusion; therapy resistance^{17,18,42,51,52}
Vascular and cardiovascular disease	Arterial ECM stiffening due to elastin fragmentation, collagen accumulation, and calcification; altered basement membrane elasticity	Endothelial dysfunction and barrier disruption; smooth muscle phenotypic switching; hypertension and atherosclerotic plaque progression^19,57,58
Pulmonary fibrosis and fibrotic lung diseases	Alveolar matrix stiffening and distortion; fibroblast foci with dense collagen; loss of compliant elastin-rich architecture	Sustained profibrotic signaling; impaired gas exchange and tissue compliance; progressive decline in lung function^10–13,49

Cancer progression and metastasis

Tumors often exhibit pronounced stiffening and reorganization of the ECM due to collagen accumulation, lysyl oxidase (LOX)-mediated crosslinking, and fiber alignment, as well as basement membrane disruption and replacement by desmoplastic interstitial matrix.^{1,2,8,17,18,42,53–56} This altered mechanical landscape is highly heterogeneous: dense, aligned collagen tracks provide low-resistance paths that guide collective invasion of tumor cells and cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs), whereas softer, proteoglycan- and hyaluronan-rich niches can shelter stem-like, slow-cycling, or therapy-tolerant tumor cell populations.^{17,18,42,53,54,56} CAFs themselves behave as mechano-responsive stromal hubs that integrate stiffness, strain, and confinement cues, and in turn deposit, remodel, and crosslink ECM, thereby amplifying local stiffness gradients and generating physical barriers to drug penetration and immune cell entry.^{17,18,42,53,54,56}

At the cellular level, stiff tumor ECM promotes malignant behaviors including enhanced proliferation, epithelial–mesenchymal transition, invasion, and metastasis, in part through integrin–FAK/Src–RhoA–ROCK signaling, YAP/TAZ activation, and mechanosensitive changes in chromatin organization and metabolism.^{6,8,17–19,41,48,53–56} Mechanotransductive signaling intersects with oncogenic and metabolic pathways to reprogram tumor cells and stromal cells, while epigenetic changes driven by ECM mechanics can sustain oncogenic programs even after removal from the stiff microenvironment.^{6,8,17–19,41,48,53–55} In parallel, tumor mechanobiology exerts profound effects on anti-tumor immunity: elevated matrix stiffness and aberrant topography impede cytotoxic T-cell and NK-cell infiltration, impair immune synapse formation, and skew myeloid cells toward immunosuppressive phenotypes, contributing to resistance to immune checkpoint blockade and other immunotherapies.^{17,42,53,54,56,57}

These insights have motivated a new generation of mechano-focused therapeutic strategies. Targeting tumor ECM mechanics—by inhibiting crosslinking enzymes such as LOX, degrading specific matrix components, modulating tumor-associated basement membranes and interstitial matrices, or blocking mechanosensing pathways in tumor and stromal cells—is under active investigation as a strategy to normalize the tumor microenvironment and improve responses to therapy.^{17,18,42,53–56,58} In preclinical models, pharmacologic or biomaterial-based softening of the tumor stroma can enhance perfusion, facilitate drug delivery, and increase T-cell infiltration and effector function, thereby boosting responses to chemo-, radio-, and immunotherapies.^{17,18,42,53–58} Conceptually, these approaches shift the focus from treating tumors solely as biochemical entities to explicitly targeting the abnormal mechanical context in which malignant and immune cells reside.

Vascular and cardiovascular diseases

In the vasculature, ECM mechanics regulate endothelial and smooth muscle cell behavior, vascular development, and tone by distributing pressure, flow-derived shear, and cyclic stretch across the arterial wall.^{19,32,59–62} Arterial ECM comprises elastic lamellae rich in elastin and fibrillin, interspersed with collagen- and proteoglycan-rich interstitial matrices and endothelial basement membranes; together, these structures define arterial stiffness, compliance, and the pattern of wall strain.^{19,32,59–62} With aging and cardiometabolic disease, fragmentation of elastin, accumulation and crosslinking of collagen, proteoglycan deposition, and focal calcification progressively stiffen the arterial wall, alter pulse wave velocity, and modify the transmission of cyclic strain to endothelial and smooth muscle cells, contributing to atherosclerosis, vascular calcification, aneurysm formation, and pulmonary hypertension.^{11,14,19,32,59–62}

Stiffened arterial ECM enhances smooth muscle cell contractility, promotes pro-inflammatory and synthetic phenotypes, and alters endothelial barrier function, while changes in basement membrane composition and elasticity impact angiogenesis, leukocyte trafficking, and vascular remodeling.^{19,32,59–62} Beyond static stiffness, complex combinations of pressure, shear stress, and cyclic stretch converge with ECM composition to regulate vascular mechanotransduction across arterial beds; regions of disturbed flow and locally stiffened matrix at branch points augment pro-atherogenic signaling, whereas compliant segments experiencing unidirectional shear promote anti-inflammatory, atheroprotective endothelial phenotypes.^{19,32,59–62} Mechanistic studies and comprehensive reviews of vascular mechanotransduction have begun to map how mechanosensitive ion channels, glycocalyx structures, and adhesion complexes integrate these forces to control vascular tone, permeability, and remodeling, and emphasize that strategies aimed at restoring physiological ECM mechanics may complement traditional blood pressure– and lipid-lowering therapies in preventing cardiovascular disease progression (Figure 3).^{19,32,59–62}

Figure 3.

Vascular ECM stiffening and calcification in vascular disease.

Conclusions

ECM mechanics reside at the critical intersection of external mechanical cues, intracellular mechanotransduction, and the balance between tissue homeostasis and pathology (Figures 3 and 4). ECM-derived forces and deformations are sensed and integrated through multi-scale, feed-forward networks that span integrin-based adhesions, cytoskeletal architecture, nuclear mechanics, and epigenetic landscapes, collectively shaping durable cell states and tissue phenotypes.^{1–6,8,9,29,30,35,36,38,41,45,46,48,61} Over the past decade, a series of conceptual advances has firmly established ECM stiffening, ECM type switching, and ECM remodeling as active drivers—rather than passive readouts—of fibrosis, cancer progression, vascular and pulmonary diseases, and defective wound repair.^{4,7–14,18,49,53,54}

Figure 4.

ECM-derived mechanical cues are transmitted through integrin adhesions to the cytoskeleton and nucleus.

Looking ahead, it will be important to decipher the mechanical “codebooks” that map specific combinations of stiffness, viscoelasticity, topology, ECM type, and spatial confinement onto defined cellular and tissue states, including their stability and reversibility.^{26–28,63,64} A central challenge is to integrate mechanobiology with multi-omics approaches so that mechanical inputs can be systematically linked to transcriptional, epigenetic, metabolic, and matrisome outputs at single-cell and spatial resolution, thereby revealing mechano-regulated molecular circuits that are amenable to therapeutic intervention. In parallel, more realistic models of dynamic cell–ECM feedback loops are needed to capture how mechanical cues and ECM types emerge, amplify, or dissipate during disease initiation, progression, and resolution across multiple temporal and spatial scales.

Mechanobiology-informed in vitro platforms—ranging from tunable synthetic and natural hydrogels to organoids cultured in engineered or decellularized ECM—provide tractable 3D testbeds to map ECM mechanical parameters to cell fate and to screen mechano-therapeutics under physiologically relevant conditions.^{14,26–28,38,48,55,61,64–68}

At the translational level, these insights can inform the development of personalized mechano-therapies that target ECM composition, crosslinking, or mechanotransductive pathways in a patient- and organ-specific manner, guided by quantitative phenotyping of mechanical and matrisome signatures. In addition, continued advances in non-invasive mechanical and ECM diagnostics —including imaging modalities and circulating ECM biomarkers—will be crucial for monitoring ECM mechanics and remodeling in vivo, for stratifying patients according to their mechanical disease phenotype, and for tracking responses to mechano-focused interventions.^{4,8–10,13,14,42,49,55,58} By tightly integrating approaches from the physical sciences, materials engineering, molecular and cell biology, and clinical medicine, the mechanobiology community is well positioned to transform fundamental insights into ECM mechanics into a new generation of diagnostic tools and mechano-targeted therapeutics that directly address the physical dimension of disease.

Footnotes

ORCID iD

Jun-Hyeog Jang

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: National Research Foundation of Korea (RS-2023-00208339), Inha University (2025).

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Hynes

. The extracellular matrix: not just pretty fibrils. Science 2009; 326(5957): 1216–1219.

Frantz

Stewart

Weaver

. The extracellular matrix at a glance. J Cell Sci 2010; 123(24): 4195–4200.

Naba

. Mechanisms of assembly and remodelling of the extracellular matrix. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2024; 25(12): 865–885.

Karamanos

Theocharis

Neill

, et al. Matrix modeling and remodeling: a biological interplay regulating tissue homeostasis and diseases. Matrix Biol 2019; 75–76: 1–11.

Discher

Janmey

Wang

. Tissue cells feel and respond to the stiffness of their substrate. Science 2005; 310(5751): 1139–1143. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1116995

Cai

Wang

Meng

. Mechanoregulation of YAP and TAZ in cellular homeostasis and disease progression. Front Cell Dev Biol 2021; 9: 673599.

Liu

Lagares

Choi

, et al. Mechanosignaling through YAP and TAZ drives fibroblast activation and fibrosis. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 2015; 308(4): L344–L357.

Tiskratok

Chuinsiri

Limraksasin

, et al. Extracellular matrix stiffness: mechanotransduction and mechanobiological response-driven strategies for biomedical applications targeting fibroblast inflammation. Polymers (Basel) 2025; 17(6): 822.

Mayorca-Guiliani

Leeming

Henriksen

, et al. ECM formation and degradation during fibrosis, repair, and regeneration. Npj Metab Health Dis 2025; 1(1): 4. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44220-024-00284-0

10.

Thannickal

Toews

White

, et al. Mechanisms of pulmonary fibrosis. Annu Rev Med 2014; 55: 395–417. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.med.55.091902.103810

11.

Upagupta

Shimbori

Alsilmi

, et al. Matrix abnormalities in pulmonary fibrosis. Eur Respir Rev 2018; 27(148): 180033.

12.

Mei

Liu

Zuo

, et al. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: an update on pathogenesis. Front Pharmacol 2022; 12: 797292. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2021.797292

13.

Wang

Wen

, et al. Extracellular matrix stiffness—The central cue for skin fibrosis. Front Mol Biosci 2023; 10: 1132353. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmolb.2023.1132353. doi.org/

14.

Baruffaldi

Palmara

Pirri

, et al. 3D cell culture: recent development in materials with tunable stiffness. ACS Appl Bio Mater 2021; 4(3): 2233–2250. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.0c01472

15.

Engler

Sen

Sweeney

, et al. Matrix elasticity directs stem cell lineage specification. Cell 2006; 126(4): 677–689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2006.06.044

16.

Pelham

RJJ

Wang

. Cell locomotion and focal adhesions are regulated by substrate flexibility. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1997; 94(25): 13661–13665. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.94.25.13661

17.

Butcher

Alliston

Weaver

. A tense situation: forcing tumour progression. Nat Rev Cancer 2009; 9(2): 108–122. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc2544

18.

Levental

Kass

, et al. Matrix crosslinking forces tumor progression by enhancing integrin signaling. Cell 2009; 139(5): 891–906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2009.10.027

19.

Humphrey

Dufresne

Schwartz

. Mechanotransduction and extracellular matrix homeostasis. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2014; 15(12): 802–812. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm3896

20.

Jaalouk

Lammerding

. Mechanotransduction gone awry. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2009; 10(1): 63–73. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm2597

21.

Vining

Mooney

. Mechanical forces direct stem cell behaviour in development and regeneration. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2017; 18(12): 728–742. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm.2017.108

22.

Geiger

Spatz

Bershadsky

. Environmental sensing through focal adhesions. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2009; 10(1): 21–33. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm2593

23.

Sun

Guo

Fässler

. Integrin-mediated mechanotransduction. J Cell Biol 2016; 215(4): 445–456. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201609037

24.

del Rio

Perez-Jimenez

Liu

, et al. Stretching single talin rod molecules activates vinculin binding. Science 2009; 323(5914): 638–641. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1162912

25.

Friedland

Lee

Boettiger

. Mechanically activated integrin switch controls α5β1 function. Science 2009; 323(5914): 642–644. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1168441

26.

Trappmann

Gautrot

Connelly

, et al. Extracellular-matrix tethering regulates stem-cell fate. Nat Mater 2012; 11(7): 642–649. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat3339

27.

Baker

Chen

. Deconstructing the third dimension: how 3D culture microenvironments alter cellular cues. J Cell Sci 2012; 125(Pt 13): 3015–3024. https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.079509

28.

Gjorevski

Nelson

. Bidirectional extracellular matrix signaling during tissue morphogenesis. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev 2009; 20(5–6): 459–465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cytogfr.2009.10.005

29.

Cho

Irianto

Discher

. Mechanosensing by the nucleus: from pathways to scaling relationships. J Cell Biol 2017; 216(2): 305–315. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201610042

30.

Discher

Smith

Cho

, et al. Matrix mechanosensing: from scaling concepts in ’omics data to mechanisms in the nucleus, regeneration, and cancer. Annu Rev Biophys 2017; 46: 295–315. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-biophys-062215-011206

31.

Pathak

Nourse

Tran

, et al. Stretch-activated ion channel Piezo1 directs lineage choice in human neural stem cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2014; 111(45): 16148–16153. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1409802111

32.

Coste

Mathur

Schmidt

, et al. Piezo1 and Piezo2 are essential components of distinct mechanically activated cation channels. Science 2010; 330(6000): 55–60. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1193270

33.

Wang

Tytell

Ingber

. Mechanotransduction at a distance: mechanically coupling the extracellular matrix with the nucleus. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2009; 10(1): 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm2594

34.

Crisp

Liu

Roux

, et al. Coupling of the nucleus and cytoplasm: role of the LINC complex. J Cell Biol 2006; 172(1): 41–53. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200509124

35.

Scott

Fraley

Rangamani

. A spatial model of YAP/TAZ signaling reveals how matrix stiffness regulates YAP/TAZ activation and localization. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2021; 118(20): e2021571118.

36.

Jafarinia

Khalilimeybodi

Barrasa-Fano

, et al. A computational modeling framework to understand fibroblast mechanoresponse to ECM stiffness and cyclic stretch. Npj Syst Biol Appl 2024; 10: 90. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41540-024-00414-9

37.

Dupont

Morsut

Aragona

, et al. Role of YAP/TAZ in mechanotransduction. Nature 2011; 474(7350): 179–183. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10137

38.

Luo

Tan

Zhu

, et al. A review on the design of hydrogels with different stiffness and their effects on tissue repair. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 2022; 10: 817391.

39.

Aragona

Panciera

Manfrin

, et al. A mechanical checkpoint controls multicellular growth through YAP/TAZ regulation by actin-processing factors. Cell 2013; 154(5): 1047–1059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2013.07.042

40.

Elosegui-Artola

Andreu

Beedle

AEM

, et al. Force triggers YAP nuclear entry by regulating transport across nuclear pores. Cell 2017; 171(6): 1397–1410.e14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2017.10.008

41.

Zha

Zhang

. The stiffness of extracellular matrix in regulating cellular metabolism. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 2025; 329: C298–C306. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpcell.00207.2024

42.

Alfano

Luthold

Halial

Labbe

, et al.

The extracellular matrix stiffening: a trigger of prostate cancer progression and castration resistance?

Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14(1): 2887. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14122887

43.

Wang

Martinac

Lee

, et al. Matrix stiffness drives drop-like nuclear deformation and lamin A/C tension to regulate YAP localization. Nat Commun 2024; 15(1): 10151. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-54577-4

44.

Lee

Yun

, et al. Matrix-induced nuclear remodeling and mechano-epigenetic control in 3D microenvironments. Cell Rep 2025; 44(9): 116176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2025.116176

45.

Swift

Ivanovska

Buxboim

, et al. Nuclear lamin-A scales with tissue stiffness and enhances matrix-directed differentiation. Science 2013; 341(6149): 1240104. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1240104

46.

Buxboim

Irianto

Swift

, et al. Matrix elasticity regulates lamin-A,C phosphorylation and turnover with feedback to actomyosin. Mol Biol Cell 2017; 28(23): 3333–3348.

47.

Maurer

Lammerding

. The driving force: nuclear mechanotransduction in cellular function, fate, and disease. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2019; 21: 443–468. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-060418-052139

48.

Gandin

Murugesan

Torresan

, et al. Simple yet effective methods to probe hydrogel stiffness for mechanobiology. Sci Rep 2021; 11(1): 22668.

49.

Ganzleben

Medoff

. Mechanobiology and the extracellular matrix in pulmonary fibrosis. iScience 2025; 28: 113993. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2025.113993

50.

Lei

Zhang

, et al. The mechanotransduction-immune axis in organ fibrosis: dual regulatory mechanisms and translational therapeutic perspectives. Front Immunol 2025; 16: 1670213. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2025.1670213

51.

Kai

Leidal

Weaver

. Tension-induced organelle stress: an emerging target in fibrosis. Trends Pharmacol Sci 2025; 46(2): 117–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tips.2024.12.006

52.

Sharma

Prathigudupu

Cable

, et al. Resolving fibrosis by stimulating HSC-dependent extracellular matrix degradation. Sci Transl Med 2025; 17(813): eads9470. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.ads9470

53.

Nicolas-Boluda

Vaquero

Vimeux

, et al. Tumor stiffening reversion through collagen crosslinking inhibition improves T cell migration and anti-PD-1 treatment. eLife 2021; 10: e58688. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.58688

54.

Setargew

YFI

Wyllie

Grant

, et al. Targeting lysyl oxidase family meditated matrix cross-linking as an anti-stromal therapy in solid tumours. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13(3): 491. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13030491

55.

Davidson

Burdick

Wells

. Engineered biomaterial platforms to study fibrosis. Adv Healthc Mater 2020; 9(16): e1901682.

56.

Mai

Lin

, et al. Modulating extracellular matrix stiffness: a strategic approach to boost cancer immunotherapy. Cell Death Dis 2024; 15(5): 307. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41419-024-06697-4

57.

Qian

Zhang

Zahm

, et al. Tumor immune mechanobiology. Curr Opin Biomed Eng 2026; 38: 100651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobme.2026.100651

58.

Karsdal

Cox

Parker

, et al. Advances in extracellular matrix-associated diagnostics and therapeutics. J Clin Med 2025; 14(6): 1856. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14061856

59.

Ballester-Servera

Alonso

Cañes

, et al. Lysyl oxidase-dependent extracellular matrix crosslinking modulates calcification in atherosclerosis and aortic valve disease. Biomed Pharmacother 2023; 167: 115469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopha.2023.115469

60.

Leng

Song

, et al. Extracellular matrix stiffness regulates microvascular stability by enhancing endothelial cell–cell junctions. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2023; 43(10): 1887–1899. https://doi.org/10.1161/ATVBAHA.123.319119

61.

Stowers

Allen

Suggs

. Dynamic phototuning of 3D hydrogel stiffness. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2015; 112(7): 1953–1958.

62.

Davis

Earley

, et al. Vascular mechanotransduction. Physiol Rev 2023; 103(2): 1247–1421. https://doi.org/10.1152/physrev.00053.2021

63.

Vogel

Sheetz

. Local force and geometry sensing regulate cell functions. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2006; 7(4): 265–275. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm1890

64.

Chaudhuri

Klumpers

, et al. Hydrogels with tunable stress relaxation regulate stem cell fate and activity. Nat Mater 2016; 15(3): 326–334. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat4489

65.

Heo

Kang

Seo

, et al. Engineering the extracellular matrix for organoid culture. Int J Stem Cells 2022; 15(1): 60–69. https://doi.org/10.15283/ijsc21190

66.

Zhao

Chen

Dowbaj

, et al. Organoids. Nat Rev Methods Primers 2022; 2(11): 94.

67.

Guo

Liu

Zhang

, et al. Decellularized extracellular matrix for organoid and engineered organ culture. J Tissue Eng 2024; 15: 20417314241300386. https://doi.org/10.1177/20417314241300386

68.

Cruz-Acuña

Kariuki

Sugiura

, et al. Engineered hydrogel reveals contribution of matrix mechanics to esophageal adenocarcinoma and identifies matrix-activated therapeutic targets. J Clin Investig 2023; 133(23): e168146. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI168146

Extracellular matrix mechanics as a master regulator of mechanotransduction in tissue homeostasis and disease

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Cell–matrix mechanotransduction: From adhesions to signaling networks

Integrin-mediated adhesions and focal adhesion maturation

Cytoskeleton dynamics and mechano-sensitive machineries

YAP/TAZ and other transcriptional mechanotransducers

ECM mechanics and cellular metabolism

The nucleus as a mechanosensitive organelle

Force transmission to the nucleus via the LINC complex

Lamin a scaling with tissue stiffness

Nuclear deformation and gene regulation

Matrix stiffness and epigenetic reprogramming

ECM mechanobiology in tissue homeostasis and disease

Fibrosis and wound healing

Cancer progression and metastasis

Vascular and cardiovascular diseases

Conclusions

Footnotes

ORCID iD

Funding

Declaration of conflicting interests

References